fletch

America is still a place where a man can get a tremendous amount of value in exchange for his talents and effort. If you think running off to the mountains and living like Jeremiah Johnson or Ted Kaczynski is the way to go then have at it. But wouldnt you, in fact, be surrendering to the 'powers that be?' Wont the 'powers that be' have forced you into that lifestyle?

It is a shame that the police are unwilling or unable to pursue this guy because it is quite likely that he has done something like this before. The good news is that this guy will probably move on. The bad news is he will probably move on to someone else.

If you thought things were looking bleak for Ron Paul, well cheer up. This should all but guarantee him a spot in the oval office. http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stori....xml&coll=2 Who could resist such a dream team?

I think Israel should do whatever it sees as necessary to insure its survival. If that means the world will hate it as a result, well, is that really all that different from what is happening today? I wouldnt be too sure that the US would join in any UN sanctions either. Under the right leadership, the US would likely stand with Israel regardless of the steps it took.

It does seem extremely well lit for being 100 feet underground. Particularly that glass dome. Even the tunnel photo seems to show sunlight entering through the windows. You might be on to something here, Bob.

I caught myself looking up at the moon last night. Now I fear I may have caused it permanent damage.

You have my condolences. Looks like you will be signing onto Kyoto soon as well. How very lucky you are. Hopefully the US will not be following Australia's leftward turn in our 2008 elections.

I think that was my fault. I used the term underaged when I should not have. Even though the law may view 16 years olds as old enough to consent to sex, I still view 16 year olds as children, not adults. But I dont think that effects the rest of what I said.

I think that is certainly true, but in the case of a teacher who has shown such incredibly poor judgement as to sleep with an under age student, it is hard to imagine that same teacher would find giving the student an undeservedly higher grade to be some unbreachable moral barrier.

Ronald McDonald. I cant start my day without that coffee in the morning.

Why? If, as you say, it is possible for a 15 year old to know the consequences of her relationship with an older man, why not a 14 year old? Or a 13 year old? Or a 12 year old. The law has to make clear what is proper behavior between an adult and a child when it comes to sexual behavior. Labeling peolpe 'student' and 'teacher' does not remove all context, it clarifies it. When a parent sends a child to school, it is done under the assumption that the adults at that school will behave as adults and temporary guardians of those children, not sexual predators. They are there to educate the kids, not seduce them.

Dont Marxists hold a similar view? That once everyone is of a like mind and like status, the state will magically melt away? I wonder which is less likely--that an all powerful state would ever 'melt away' or that you could get everyone to agree on a single form of government.

I think the youtube guy's point is that the state must initiate force in order to have a monoploly on force. He cites this as a contradiction without really explaining it any further.

Capitalist domination in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America? Thats a new one. You may have him list these oppressive 'capitalist' states, if he can. The reason for the poverty in those areas is precisely the lack of freedom and the lack of capitalism. He is doing what any good marxist will do--blame capitalism for the failings of collectivism. What he is describing here is communism, or some other form of collectivism, not capitalism. He is describing the priviledged elite in a statist tyranny, and the power they exercise over the masses, not a free society. I am sure your marxist foe believes that he could make socialism work if only he were given the opportunity. intellectualammo is correct, socilaism fails because it is immoral. It does not become less so the more it becomes 'implemented.' It only becomes more evil.

Chavez is a menace, and he seems to be getting a major pass from the media. The left, of course, love him, while the right seem to be unable to mount any sustained criticism of him. With $100 per barrel oil to prop him up, Chavez has the chance to make his brand of socialism appealing to the vulnerable states around him. He could become Castro...with a bank account.

Which, of course, makes him so much wiser than the rest of mankind. He praises Marx, blasts captialism, then pretends to be some sort of uncommitted objective expert. I could swear I have debated this guy....or his clone. Maybe they all have some sort of commie hand book they follow.

But the dog doesnt actively engage in the trading of values, though. When you go to the pound to pick out a puppy, you dont lay out the advantages you are prepared to offer the prospective pet and choose from those animals that step forward. You pick the dog you like and it has to accept whatever advantages being a domesticated pet in your household has to offer. You are its master, not its trading partner.

It never occured to me to go back 70 years to get the context of the Marxists allegations of corn dumping. When someone says "Tons of corn is dumped in the sea every year to make remaining stocks more valuable," I think present tense. I could find no evidence that this practice is going on today. Nor would such a practice make any sense in a free market economy. It is no surprise, however, that if such a boneheaded action ever did happen, it happened during the presidency of FDR. But it is typical for Marxists and socialists to blame greedy capitalists for everything evil under the sun and give the state a pass.

You might start by questioning what they put out as fact: How many tons? Who did the dumping, and how? Considering that the the United States produced 283 million metric tons of corn in 2006 and that was only 42 percent of the world's corn production in that year, it is difficult to imagine how many million of tons of corn would have to be dumped to have even the slightest impact on price. What food?

If the arms are going to totalitarian regimes that use those weapons to strengthen their grip on power and oppress their populations, then the sale is immoral. Particularly if the seller is a society built upon principles of liberty. I am not sure why you would morally oppose it yet politically sanction it, however.

When confronted by a hungry bear in the woods, do you: a. begin a lengthy discussion of trading value for value b. run like hell c. pull a gun and open fire If you do anything but c. you will have succeeded only in sacrificing a value--your life--to the bears hunger and have gotten nothing of value in return. I think the quote from Ayn Rand that you seem so fond of assumes the rationality of the traders involved. That would exclude animals, obviously, as well as any appeal to "altruistic values."

The masses (or the mob) are always irrational. The difficulty is not in persuading the masses to soak the rich, the difficulty is in defending the rich and their rights to keep the fruits of their own labor. When the victim sanctions his own victimization as Buffett has done here by gleefully surrendering those rights and throwing his wallet on the altar of the state, it makes any effort at defense seem almost pointless.

You mean like this guy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_List He killed his mom, his wife, and his three kids. For the next 18 years he was a model citizen. Do you think he "can almost certainly be trusted?"

I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong here, but I think Ayn Rand linked peace with justice, as in, where justice exists, peace will exist also. The problem is not that there are "many people, pacifists, socialists, communists, environmentalists, Islamists, who are perfectly willing to live as slaves." The problem arises when these people who are willing to live as slaves impose this slavery on those who do not.

If the Student was really interested in making a case for God he would have replied to some of the questions posed by the professor in the first half of the post rather than remaining silent. The so-called "proof' offered by the Student at the end was proof of nothing. Take the existence of the Professors brain, for example. Unlike God, the brain is something that can be seen, touched and, I assume, smelled. The professor could prove that he has a brain by offering to submit to open-head surgery, have his brain removed and passed around the class for inspection. The problem is, he would not likely survive the test. That reminds of the scene from The Holy Grail where they would throw a suspected witch in the water. If she floated, she was a witch and would be burned at the stake, if she sank (and drowned) she was not a witch. That is correct. The fact that theists have tried to move into the realm of science or reason to prove the existence of God is a sign of the weakness of faith, not its strength.